Partners Group Holding AG (PGHN) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Partners Group's announcement of AuM as of 30th June 2026. I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, David Layton. Please go ahead, sir.

Hello, everyone, and welcome to Partners Group's H1 2026 Business Update and Outlook Call. I'm Dave, CEO of Partners Group. And today, I'll be joined by Juri, President; and Roberto, our Head of Portfolio Solutions. Joris, our CFO; and Danica, will also be available if needed for the Q&A. Despite a somewhat mixed environment for the industry in H1, we're proud to have delivered numbers that continue to demonstrate that we are a highly differentiated all-weather investment firm. We added a record of $16 billion of total new assets in H1 with solid demand across a variety of asset classes and offerings, the diversification of our platform benefits us in a market like this. The investment side was a bit slower in the period. We deployed $9 billion in H1, new investments are often demanding high valuations, particularly in private equity, and we were unfortunately [indiscernible] the number of opportunities this year but found good relative value on the portfolio side, and we had a mix tilted towards more portfolio assets. Finally, we generated $9 billion of realizations. We locked in some solid outcomes for clients. We completed a number of exits at the end of last year, which meant that we didn't have as many new exits completed in H1, but we remain pleased with the exit pipeline for H2 and future periods. Next slide. Now in this update, we're going to cover a number of topics, which we understand are interest for investors. And some of these are business topics, which are on plan and others are challenges that we're currently working to address. But before we do that, I first wanted to set a context for those business updates. And that is that when we take a step back and look at the broad number of things that we're working on across the platform, we see over 80% of the business is in good shape across investments, across business initiatives, 20%, I would say, is in need of work. Now how does that compare to normal times? Well, during benign markets, smooth sailing, I would always say it's 90-10. you would usually see 10% programs or portfolio -- portfolios or initiatives that are needing extra attention. And anyone who's ever run a business, much less a portfolio of businesses can tell you that, that's normal. And today, in a more complex environment, it's 20%. And that's not unlike other complex environments that we have navigated in the past. Now some of those areas in need of increased attention include certain portfolio companies with a particular reference to that 2021 time period, which we've talked about in the past. We need to stay close to these investments and focus on hands on value creation, and Roberto will speak to that. Now we're not alone in having made investments during that time period, but we were somewhat alone in having managed more substantial private equity evergreens through that vintage. And we have net outflows in some of those mature evergreens. We take this very seriously. We want to ensure that our clients get what they expect from our programs [indiscernible]. Next slide. Now in this update, we're going to cover a number of topics, which we understand are of interest for investors. And some of these are business topics, which are on plan and others are challenges that we're currently working to address. But before we do that, I first wanted to set a context for those business updates. And that is that when we take a step back and look at the broad number of things that we're working on across the platform, we see over 80% of the business is in good shape across investments, across business initiatives, 20%, I would say, is in need of work. Now how does that compare to normal times? Well, during benign markets, smooth sailing, I would always say it's 90-10, you would usually see 10% of programs or portfolio portfolios or initiatives that are needing extra attention. And anyone who's ever run a business, much less a portfolio of businesses can tell you that, that's normal. And today, a more complex environment, it's 20%, and that's not unlike other complex environments that we have navigated in the past. Now some of those areas in need of increased attention include certain portfolio companies with a particular reference to that [ 21 ] time period, which we've talked about in the past, we need to stay close to these investments and focus on hands-on value creation. Roberto will speak to that. Now we're not alone in having made investments during that time period, but we were somewhat alone in having added more substantial private equity evergreens through that vintage. And we have net outflows in some of those mature evergreens. We take this very seriously. We want to ensure that our clients get what they expect from our programs and investments, and we, therefore, are giving a lot of attention to that topic. But the vast majority of business initiatives and investment programs across the platform continue to go very well. On Slide 4, now Juri will provide AuM update, including our H1 fundraising and investment figures. This was a strong period for fundraising in particular. And in the second part of the presentation, Roberto will provide a business update on some of these areas of focus on the client side and the investment side. Juri, over to you for the AuM update.

Thank you, Dave. Now of the $16 billion in H1 '26, we saw strong demand actually across all the offerings. If we look at here on the left side of the pie chart, Bespoke solutions continue to be the largest contributor, about 52%. That constitutes of the Evergreens and the mandates. We saw particularly strong demand from institutional investors out of Asia, out of the Middle East. So staying with that pie chart here regarding traditional funds, $7.5 billion here. If we put that into context, that was in the first half, it's roughly the same amount that we raised in the entire 2025 with traditional funds being 48% of the fundraise in the first half. So a very strong first half in terms of traditional funds. The momentum was still fueled by some of our infrastructure offerings that had a final close towards the end of this first half, but also successful closing of our latest private equity secondary program. To provide some further historic context. Next slide here, in H1 '26, we continued the record fundraising dynamics from 2025, raising more than in any other half year period as shown in the bar chart here on the left. Now this strong fundraising was driven by from our equity strategy. So we're slice and dicing it here on the right by investment strategy. 70% of that coming from private equity, infrastructure and real estate raising over $10 billion. It's probably also fair to say, as you see the upper right a bit that we've been a bit in an infrastructure fundraising cycle here. in the first half, which is about to be followed by a private equity cycle. I was not that we timed this exactly quarter-by-quarter, but just directionally, there is that effect that you see here. I'd like to point out that also credit contributed the quarter of the fundraising. And our fifth asset class royalties raised about $1 billion in the first half, increasing those AUMs in the first half by over 50%. So very strong demand for royalties, our fifth asset class, where by now we build a 7-year sort of strong track record and strong client demand for that asset class. So overall, our fundraising continues to be strongly diversified with all asset classes and regions contributing meaningfully. Now with that, turning to our Evergreen platform. We're also here, we continue to see meaningful flows with total demand of $4.2 billion in the first time historic context. It's almost as much as the full year in 2023, as shown by the bar chart here. Maybe one of the key differences to be pointed out, shown by the shaded area here is that 80% of inflows in the first half of this year came from our broader Evergreen platform. Now that represents around 30 diversified [indiscernible] offerings with more fund launches. So that's a diversified generation of funds, including the royalty evergreens, the next-generation infrastructure, et cetera, that are seeing very strong traction. However, turning to the right here, we've also seen an increase in redemptions with $3.8 billion in H1. Now these are highly concentrated with select mature evergreens, which have triggered or expected to trigger redemption limits. We currently have over $1 billion of redemption requests in H2. That includes already the rolled over ones as well as some received forms for H2. So overall, while the 3 mature strategies saw elevated redemptions, we continue to see strong traction from our broader Evergreen platform. Now turning to the investment side. Also here, we saw a very, very strong investment activity in 2025 with $27 billion last year. However, in the first half of '26 investing $9 billion. I'd say we had a more cautious approach an environment that was -- had macroeconomic uncertainty, geopolitical topics, et cetera, especially on the direct side, also some [indiscernible] situations here in the first half -- having said that, in volatile times like this, we've been able to capitalize by our portfolio assets, especially in private equity, but also infrastructure secondary transactions. We saw good relative value in strong diversification for our clients. Last comment I'd like to make here on this slide is to the investment pipeline. It's a solid investment pipeline. I have seen a pickup from Q1 to Q2 in that investment pipeline, especially within our thematic focus areas attractive opportunities here. So I expect to execute on the pipeline in the quarters to come. Moving on to realizations. The USD 9 billion in the first half they were driven across direct as well as portfolio assets, sort of a 60-40 split here. As a reminder, as we had communicated on the last call, the H1 realizations, they had been impacted to some extent by significant exits in late 2025. So we had some significant exits towards the December sort of time frame that slipped into the '25 already. But having said that, we have a strong direct equity exit line that's to be executed over the next 3-year cycle. So those exits you don't exactly plan quarter-by-quarter, but there is a good midterm pipeline ahead. So with that, let me dive into some examples on the next page. In with exited investments across infrastructure, private equity and real estate. So on top of the page here regarding infrastructure, for example, we've realized atnorth, that's the Nordic data center that we have built pretty much from scratch to the leading largest Pan-Nordic data center platform, enterprise value around $4 billion and we monetize that at 2.5x on multiple on behalf of our clients, but also very strong realizations for private equity, where we have continued to sell stakes at Vishal, one of India's largest value retailer for over 8x money multiple. Again, as a reminder, that was the largest IPO in India of the country, frankly speaking, ever, private equity backed, so landmark transaction, very good results for our clients over 8x. But also Galderma from our private equity platform, Swiss manufacturer of skin care and dermatology products at over 3.5x money multiple, we are for our clients. So on average, we achieved an uplift of over 10% at exit compared to where we held the assets on our books sort of 6 months earlier, I guess, being testament for quality assets on our books and good realizations. Now with that, tying it all together in terms of AuM development, let's take a close look at the AuM bridge. As you're aware, our guidance specifically covers fundraising and tail downs. So in H1, having raised $16 billion, we had tail-downs amounting to $6.6 billion. We had provided you with guidance of $10 million to $13 million for the full year as the pay down of certain older traditional funds shifted from '25 to '26 as communicated. Now going forward, we expect a slight increase in the coming year. Moving to redemptions. They came in at $3.8 billion. Now maybe looking at the split year by quarter, we had a USD 1.7 billion in Q1, $2.1 billion in Q2 again, providing some level of guidance here, we expect Q2 to be the run rate for the next quarters, as Roberto will explain further. Other effects and FX amounted to minus $4.6 billion, they include NAV developments. Foreign exchange effects had a negative impact mainly due to the euro depreciating against the U.S. dollar. As a reminder, 46% of our AuM is in euro-denominated programs and mandates. So overall, AuM growth in H1 was impacted by tail downs, redemptions and FX, but outweighed by some client demand. With that, I hand over to Roberto now. Thank you.

Thank you, Juri. Let me start this business update by providing a transparent overview of the current state of our investment portfolio. Based on bottom-up analysis, asset by asset, we see that 85% of our platform is performing at or above plan. However, roughly 15% of our investments are below plan. 3 of those assets are within our private equity portfolio. There are some investments we made between 2018 and 2022 before the interest rate hikes, which, therefore, faced valuation adjustments over the past years. But it also includes a few other companies with idiosyncratic issues. The remaining 5% of assets below plan are investments within our real estate portfolio, such as office assets and infrastructure investments or credits in our watch list. These assets below plan are already reflected in the lower performance of some of our strategies over the past 2 years as well as in our H1 performance. Our investment teams are working closely with these businesses to return to a higher growth path. In a low case, for example, if the environment becomes more volatile or challenging, we estimate that these investments could have an additional $2 billion to $4 billion impact on returns over the midterm. It sounds like a meaningful number but when put into perspective with our net asset value of $124 billion, it represents roughly 2% to 3% of the portfolio. At the same time, if we look at the 85% of the portfolio that is performing in line with our expectations. We see upside potential of $20 billion in the midterm. This is based on cautious assumptions across the portfolio, including exit and operational improvements, which we are actively working on. But let me dive a bit deeper in the dynamics of our private equity portfolio. When you look at the track record of our private equity direct funds, our first 3 vintages are top quartile funds with net multiples above 2.2x. Our fourth vintage, however, has been investing between 2019 and 2022 and is facing headwinds of those vintages, reflecting the entry valuations and so realization. The performance of this Fund IV will be lower than previous vintages, but very importantly, in line with industry peers. How does this translate to our bespoke solutions? We have spoken in past calls about the impact of these challenging vintages on our evergreen portfolios. But I would like today cover our mandates as well. When we manage a mandate for an institutional investor, we define the investment pace per year to ensure consistent deployment and vintage diversification. Evergreens are somewhat different because flow dynamics may increase the pro cyclicalities of deployment, our mature private equity evergreens had significant inflows in 2020, '21 and '22. And therefore, we have to increase deployment. We put limitations on investor subscriptions at the time to protect existing investors and maintain [indiscernible] that mitigated but obviously didn't make it completely go away. After 2022, distributions within the portfolios of those funds slowed down and redemptions increased, resulting in a 50% lower annual deployment for the mature evergreen funds and the vintages thereafter. Due to the significantly higher deployment during the cycle before, Evergreen portfolios have a higher concentration to those vintages compared to mandates. Evergreens have 50% to 60% exposure to these vintages while private equity mandates are lower at roughly 40%. As a result, our Evergreen platform has a 50% higher exposure to the industries vintages with headwinds compared to our mandates, but these vintages represent only 20%. So the challenges we face in some of our mature Evergreens are the result of industry-wide vintage headwinds and procyclical flow dynamics, but not a reflection of investment capacity. Moving over to Evergreens and providing an update on looking at our more recent evergreen strategies, we got off to a strong start, building attractive track records across asset classes. And just picking up the topic from the previous slide, the top 2 performing new evergreen strategies actually happened to be private equity focused evergreen funds. On the right, however, you see our infrastructure evergreens, for example, delivering an 18% annualized return since inception and ranking amongst the leading funds in its peer groups. These results continue to support strong client demand and reinforce our strategy of broadening the Evergreen platform. Looking ahead, these strategies will continue to be an important driver of our growth. Evergreen funds represent 30% of our total AuM. Our mature funds, which are mostly private wealth focused and make up $35 million in assets under management, have seen elevated redemptions over the past quarters and specifically an uptick in Q2 2026. The -- while increased redemptions over the past 12 to 18 months were due to investor rebalancing and competitive dynamics within the Evergreen market, the real change from the first quarter to the second quarter this year were the external effects. We faced industry concerns on software, private credit evergreen, liquidity limitations, negative media coverage and high geopolitical volatility. The mix of these factors led to a sharp increase in redemptions from roughly 2% per quarter to over 5% for some of our mature private equity evergreen funds. We have, therefore, enacted and are likely to enact redemption limits on [indiscernible] vehicles across those 3 mature evergreen strategies. As we have publicly stated on multi locations, we believe this protects the interest of all investors and is the right approach from a portfolio and investment perspective. We have sufficient liquidity in those funds, and we'll continue to invest for the ongoing investors, which represent the large majority of the investor base in those funds. We expect these redemption limitations to stay for a number of quarters. In the medium term, we estimate the potential outflows from these funds to be up to $10 billion to $20 billion negative scenario. This will, however, be compensated by growth from the broader Evergreen platform. As a result, we expect a period of more moderate growth in the medium term before returning to our long-term growth rate in Evergreen. And with that, over to Dave.

Thank you, Roberto. We expect the environment in 2026 to remain complex, but we believe that we have shown that we're well positioned to differentiate ourselves and to navigate that complexity. In terms of 2026 guidance for new assets, we expect to be between $26 million and $32 billion for the full year, reflecting continued strong fundraising momentum. Regarding taildowns, we estimate $10 billion to $13 billion of tail-downs in 2026 driven by closed-end traditional funds. And for redemptions, we anticipate that the current redemption dynamics will continue for a few periods, and this could potentially slow our net AuM growth by 1% to 2% during the next 18 months. Next slide. Turning to our performance income outlook. From 2023 to 2025, generated CHF 1.7 billion in performance fees. These were highly diversified across asset classes and strategies, and these fees represented 26% of our revenues over those periods. The majority came from private equity but we've seen an increasing contribution from our infrastructure business. Our mandates and traditional programs contributed roughly 2/3 and Evergreens contributed 36%. The Performance fees are driven primarily by 2 factors: exits from our portfolio and Evergreens where performance fees are linked to NAV. We continue to expect performance income for the full year to be around the lower end of the 25% to 40% range for this year. We expect performance fees this year to be weighted towards H2. For H1, we expect performance income to likely be below 20%. Looking further ahead, we have a meaningful exit pipeline over the next 3 years. And as such, we feel confident in our midterm guidance for performance income to continue to account for 25% to 40% of our revenue. And with that, I'd like to hand over to the operator to open the lines for Q&A.

[Operator Instructions] And now we're going to take our first question, and it comes from line of Nicholas Herman from Citi.

Just -- 3 for me, please. Firstly, on the inflows. So you've just raised $8 billion per quarter in the first half. The run rate of Evergreen and mandate inflows was weaker in the second quarter and appears to run rate at around $14 billion. Could you just talk about what has driven the slowdown in flows in mandates specifically? And how much traditional fundraising do you expect in the second half -- so that gives you kind of I guess, confident guess more body will give you that confidence then that you can deliver the $26 billion plus guide for this year? Then the other one I had, please, was you said in March that you were expected about over $2 billion of inflows from the new strategic joint ventures this year. Could you please give us an update on expectations for this year and how those strategic joint ventures have been progressing? And then finally, I guess this year has reminded everyone of the volatility and activity of the wealth channel. I know wealth is only 20% of your AuM. But I guess, how have the events of this year made you consider the optimal mix of cap or private market managers by Partners Group.

Maybe I'll take topic #2, comment a little bit about topic #3 and then Roberto, I'll hand it over to you to take question 1 and to provide some more color as well. So the strategic JVs continue to develop in a [indiscernible] way. We raised about $1 billion last year. And I said earlier in the year that we thought that, that could be $2 billion this year. We also communicated that there would be some areas of fundraising that could be impacted by the current redemption dynamics and lead to a little bit of a slowdown. So if it -- we're developing well there. We're at about $800 million for those JVs in the first half of this year and continue to see good momentum in a number of those. Some of them are developing a little bit slower than expected. Some of them are a little bit ahead of plan. So I'm not sure if we'll get quite to the 100% growth rate in JV partnerships, but still a very positive development there. And with regard to question #3, yes, wealth is 20% of our assets under management. We've been -- like we have for other segments, but particularly well known for being an innovator within that wealth segment. And we've always been a big proponent of diversification within distribution. We are an institutional -- we think like an institution as it relates to distribution. I think we think about our mandate clients and big institutional clients as being very, very strategic to the firm. We think about the wealth channel as being very important in a number of areas. And we try and build a balanced set of [indiscernible] that cater to different needs. And -- sometimes the market is excited in one area or another. Sometimes institutional investors are chewing on large allocations, and it's kind of slower there. And sometimes the wealth market is rebalancing their portfolios and create some redemption issue, and it creates a lot of noise and -- but we're not a firm that kind of moves in and out of these categories based on that sentiment. We really believe in building long-term solutions for these channels over the long run. And the development of our platform won't be a straight line. We know that. The development of the industry won't be a straight line, but we do believe that diversified distribution is an asset of the firm, and we anticipate continuing that. Roberto, do you want to comment on the flow dynamics Q1 versus Q2?

Look happy to. I think, first of all, I think given I would really base run rates of half year over type of fundraising. This is too many things that are moving what happens in a specific 3-month period. Think about some of our mandates start becoming fee-paying as we make investments. So there's different drivers really that will drive what happens in any 3-month period. If I look at your question around full year guidance and the traditional fundraising contributing to it. We do have on the Evergreen side, a roughly similar run rate in the books for the second half, which correspondingly means you add this up to $10 million to $16 million for the second half reconfirming our full year range of [indiscernible].

And the question comes line of Hubert Lam from Bank of America.

I've got 3 of them. Firstly, can you talk a bit about the redemption dynamics you've seen, like which region are you seeing the outcomes from? Is it mainly Asia in Europe? Or are you also seeing in the U.S.? And also, are you also seeing redemptions coming from not only retail investors, but also institutional investors as well now? That's the first question. The second question is on fee margin and the impact of that. So how should we think about recurring fee margin going forward, given that the outflows of many come from the Evergreen side, which is higher margin? As you mentioned, like 25% of your fundraising has been in credit, which is lower fee margin. So how should we think about that going forward? And lastly, how should we think about potential impact to dividend? If you look at consensus and forecast, we possibly see a potential for this year's dividend. If you assume last year's dividend to be uncovered. Would you think about things you can have just to keep it.

Roberto, why don't you take the first question on the dynamics. Joris, you take question #2 on fee margin, and then I'll cover the dividend.

Happy to on the redemption dynamics, I think there's a couple of things to say. First of all, this [indiscernible] is largely limited to the 3 mature private equity-heavy strategies that we have been discussing and disclosing before. I think as far as it pertains to the regional split, we do not see any specific patterns. It's pretty much in line where the assets under management are for those 3 strategies. Lastly, when it's about client type, we clearly see this effect mainly playing out on the private wealth side of things, which is the driver of the large majority of those redemptions.

Now looking at the -- your question about the recurring revenue margin. It is a result of several factors. As we repeat, it's our mix in asset classes and the products and the impact from acquisition, and comparing it to what the impact is going to be if the mature evergreens see more redemptions that will be a slightly negative impact. Now if we look at the overall management income margin, especially if we look at half year 1, then we see also which is the onetime fees, which includes late management fees as an example from the closing of Infra 4, which have a positive element. So overall, I think if we look at half year 1 2026 [indiscernible] on the management income margin, we expect to be at similar levels than the full year.

And that infrastructure fund is attractive margin business as well, where you saw meaningful assets coming into replace some of those Evergreen assets. Now as it relates to the dividend, look, the dividend is an important factor for us. We continue to target dividend stability and long-term growth, and our approach remains unchanged. And those of you that have followed us for some time know that. To the point that back in 2023, we took a look not only at that year, but also the cash generation from pending exits and our confidence in the positive developments of the platform to have a payout ratio that was even north of 100% in that case. And so this is indeed an area a focus for our leadership team, and we currently don't anticipate any change to our approach or delivery. One note is that I do expect to debate in our next board meeting around share buyback versus dividend. And so we do believe that this is an attractive level to buy, but there's nothing to report on there. But we continue to be within our base case expectation for performance fees generated this year and no change to the expectation on dividend.

Next question and it comes in of Sharath Kumar from Deutsche Bank.

I have 2, please. First one is on performance fees. You mentioned $20 billion of planned exits for this year. and that kind of the 25% guidance of performance fees that you expect to generate this year. So how much of the 25% guidance of performance fees will be generated from these exits? In other words, can you provide a proportion of performance fees earned from Evergreen funds? That is my first one. And the second is you spoke a bit about this and you call about the deployment and realization pipeline. So for the $20 billion of planned exits, is it the base case? Or do you kind of going to see some more improvement. So I wanted to understand the deployment and realization pipeline a little bit more detail.

Yes. So maybe I'll start with the second. So with regards to the realization pipeline, this has much more to do with timing than needing and improvement in the market environment or market context. We have quite a process that needs to be gone through in order to sell a private asset to realize the performance fees associated with it. It can also take months and months. And so with a very strong push towards the end of last year, to generate the realizations that came in 2025, it meant that we came into the first part of this year with a little bit of a lower pipeline of transactable assets. But as we look at the full year, we do believe that we're on track to be within that 25% to 40% range, although we continue to believe that we'll probably be at the lower end of that range. With regards to performance fees, we showed in the presentation the historical mix of performance fees that have come from evergreen programs. We have indeed taken into account some slower developments within those programs, the mature programs, in particular as it relates to our updated performance fee guidance. And so we're not providing guidance on exactly how much we're modeling out for H2 from evergreens versus other vehicles, but we have indeed taken into account the changed dynamic with regards to those mature evergreen funds in particular.

And it comes line of Arnaud Giblat from BNP Pariba.

Firstly, thank you for the Slide 14 with the sharing the difference in exposure to 2022 vintages for the Evergreens versus mandate. My question is, how much can we extrapolate from that data to try and guestinate what the performance in mandates might be I mean, I would be thinking still probably an annual return in the high single-digit area. Would that be fair? And secondly, my second question relates to that. I'm just wondering to the mandate business is being submitted to competitive dynamics. I mean, the flows in this half at a lower level. I'm just wondering, given that a number of your competitors have gone multi-assets and acquired secondary capabilities. To what extent are you seeing new entrants or new high levels of competition for mandates? And my final question relates to Slide 16. There we can see mature strategies declining all the way into 2033. So are you basically suggesting that is that your base case that the redemptions continue until then and there's no turnaround? Or is there a case where performance improves, you could get an improvement sooner.

Roberto, let me toss it over to you for those.

So maybe on the first one, on the mandates difference in exposure to 2022, it's truly difficult to bring performance to a single number for the mandates because they vary in terms of scope. But I think it's probably fair to say, if you want a proxy or think about it on the previous slide, we had a chart where we showed our private equity direct strategy and all the funds that were first for tile, but then the Fund IV, which is more in the middle of the pack. So you probably can think of mandates rather as a mix of those than versus using the evergreens as a proxy. In terms of competitive dynamics, I'm not so sure whether the technology with the single line investment is being broadly adopted in the market, I think that requires quite some setting yourself up in terms of governance, in terms of operational platform to cater to basically split investments across a variety of mandate clients, I do think there's quite some barriers to entry that cannot be easily replicated from one quarter to the other. I will really challenge a bit the notion though that the mandate business has slowed down in the second quarter, maybe a to get a bit deeper into how some of the mechanics work. Many of those mandates have fee bases that make AuM accountable based on investments that we make as opposed to commitments. So if we have a quarter where the investment volume is relatively low, it's quite natural that you would have a lower amount of so-called tail ups that might have influenced that specific 3-month period. But as Dave alluded to, and Juri in their respective parts, it's a conscious decision for us to invest cautiously in the environment we are in. Maybe last on your observation on the Evergreen. This is on purpose, shown as a conservative case. I'm absolutely with you. There are scenarios where we see a more positive dynamic in those funds as well. We use the slide to depict that even in a more challenging scenario, a lot of the growth actually in the future is going to be carried by a much broader evergreen platform with a variety of different funds, but also strategic partnerships, as opposed to just a few single funds driving the outcome there.